The Obama
administration has allowed the UN Security Council to adopt a resolution
demanding an end to Israeli settlements, defying pressure from US
President-elect Donald Trump as well as Israel and several US senators who
urged Washington to use its veto.

Key points:

The UN votes in
favour of resolution calling for the end of Israeli settlements condemning
them as having "no legal validity"

14 of the 15 member states voted
in favour, US abstained from voting

Israeli Energy Minister says the
US "has abandoned its only friend in the Middle East"

The resolution
was put forward at the 15-member council for a vote on Friday by New
Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal a day after Egypt withdrew it under
pressure from Israel and Mr Trump. Israel and Mr Trump had called on the
United States to veto the measure.

It was adopted with 14 votes in
favour, to a round of applause. It is the first resolution the Security
Council has adopted on Israel and the Palestinians in nearly eight
years.

The US decision to abstain was a relatively rare step by
Washington, which usually shields Israel from such action.

The US
abstention was seen as a parting shot at policy by US President Barack
Obama, who has had an acrimonious relationship with Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and who has made settlements a major target of peace
efforts that have proven ultimately futile.

The resolution demanded that
Israel "immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the
occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem" and said the
establishment of settlements by Israel had "no legal validity and
constitutes a flagrant violation under international law".

"This is not a resolution
against settlements, it is an anti-Israel resolution, against the Jewish
people and the state of the Jews. The United States tonight has simply
abandoned its only friend in the Middle East," Mr Steinitz, who is close to
Mr Netanyahu, told local media.

Mr Trump tweeted shortly after the
decision, addressing the UN. External Link: @realDonaldTrump: "As to the UN,
things will be different after Jan 20th"

A spokesman for Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas said the resolution was a blow to Israeli
policy.

"The Security Council resolution is a big blow to Israeli policy,
a unanimous international condemnation of settlements and a strong support
for the two-state solution," spokesman Nabil Abu Rdainah said in a
statement.

Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat said an end to
Israeli settlements marked "a day of victory".

"This is a day of
victory for international law, a victory for civilized language and
negotiation and a total rejection of extremist forces in Israel," he told
Reuters.

A resolution needs nine votes in favour and no vetoes by the
United States, France, Russia, Britain or China to be adopted.

The
Palestinians want an independent state in the West Bank, Gaza and East
Jerusalem, areas Israel captured in a 1967 war.

Israel disputes that
settlements are illegal and says their final status should be determined in
talks on Palestinian statehood. The last round of US-led peace talks between
the Israelis and Palestinians collapsed in 2014.

The passage of the
resolution changes nothing on the ground between Israel and the Palestinians
and likely will be all but ignored by the incoming Trump
administration.

More than a symbolic move

The resolution formally
enshrined the international community's disapproval of Israeli settlement
building and could spur further Palestinian moves against Israel in
international forums.

Mr Trump, who called for a veto along with Mr
Netanyahu, is likely to be a more staunch supporter of Mr Netanyahu's
right-wing policies. He named a hardline pro-Israel ambassador and vowed to
move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

A senior Israeli
official said on Thursday if adopted there was "zero chance" the Israeli
Government would abide by the measure.

Under the UN Charter, UN member
states "agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security
Council".

"It was to be expected that Israel's greatest ally would act in
accordance with the values that we share and that they would have vetoed
this disgraceful resolution," Israel's ambassador to the UN, Danny
Danon, said after the vote.

"I have no doubt that the new US
administration and the incoming UN secretary-general will usher in a new era
in terms of the UN's relationship with Israel."

ZOA urges President Obama and UN Ambassador Samantha Power to
veto the (now postponed) anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, anti-peace, racist
resolution that the UN Security Council (UNSC) had initially planned to vote
on today. The proposed resolution would make all of the Jewish
communities in Judea/Samaria and eastern Jerusalem in the lawful,
millennia-old Jewish homeland suddenly "have no legal validity" and "a
flagrant violation" of international law; would require Israel to halt
construction in these areas; makes false statements about international
law; falsely claims that these Jewish communities are a "major
obstacle"; calls on all nations to discriminate against Jewish
communities in Judea/Samaria and eastern Jerusalem; and would require
Israel to return to indefensible 1949 Armistice lines (misleadingly
called "1967 borders").

ZOA praises President-elect Donald Trump for
condemning the anti-Israel UNSC resolution, and the President-elect’s
nominee for U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman for working
relentlessly to try to stop this anti-Israel resolution.

For the
following reasons, the proposed resolution must be vetoed – and Congress and
President-elect Trump should declare that they will end all funding to the
UN and Palestinian Authority ("PA") if the resolution comes to a vote and
passes:

The proposed resolution drastically changes U.S. policy and
harms the peaceful transition to the new U.S. administration: Failing to
veto the proposed resolution would dramatically change and destabilize U.S.
and international law and policy, and thus would violate President Obama’s
pledge to assure a peaceful transition to the incoming Trump
administration.

As Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon accurately
said, the proposed UNSC resolution "will do nothing to promote a diplomatic
process, and will only reward the Palestinian policy of incitement and
terror."

As liberal Democrat Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz noted when
a similar resolution was proposed in 2011: "the real reason the U.S.
should veto this ill-conceived resolution is that it is inconsistent
with U.S. policy, which has long advocated a negotiated resolution of
the Palestinian-Israeli dispute." ("The U.N. Gangs Up On Israel –
Again," by Alan Dershowitz, Wall Street J’nal, Jan. 26, 2011.)
[...]

U.S.
Abstains as U.N. Security Council Votes to Condemn Israeli Settlements

By
SOMINI SENGUPTA and RICK GLADSTONEDEC. 23, 2016

UNITED NATIONS — Defying
extraordinary pressure from President-elect Donald J. Trump and furious
lobbying by Israel, the Obama administration on Friday allowed the United
Nations Security Council to adopt a resolution that condemned Israeli
settlement construction.

The administration’s decision not to veto the
measure broke a longstanding American policy of serving as Israel’s
sturdiest diplomatic shield at the United Nations.

While the measure
will have no practical impact on the ground, it was regarded as a major
rebuff to Israel that could increase its isolation over the paralyzed peace
process with the Palestinians, who have sought to establish their own state
on territory held by Israel.

Applause broke out in the 15-member Security
Council’s chambers following the vote on the measure, which passed 14-0,
with the United States abstaining.

The vote came a day after Mr.
Trump personally intervened to keep the measure, proposed by Egypt, from
coming up for a vote on Thursday, as scheduled. Mr. Trump’s aides said he
had spoken to the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Both men also
spoke to the Egyptian president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Egypt postponed the
vote.

But in a show of mounting frustration, four other countries on the
Security Council — Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal and Venezuela — all of
them relatively powerless temporary members with rotating two-year
seats, snatched the resolution away from Egypt and put it up for a vote
Friday afternoon.

The departing Obama administration has been highly
critical of Israel’s settlement building, describing it as an impediment to
a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Mr. Trump has made
clear that he will take a far more sympathetic approach to Israel when his
administration assumes office in a month. Photo Construction at an
Israeli settlement in the West Bank in 2015. Credit Tomas Munita for The
New York Times

Mr. Trump’s comments on the issue amounted to his most
direct intervention on United States foreign policy during his transition to
power.

The United States ambassador, Samantha Power, portrayed the
abstention as consistent with the American disapproval of
settlement-building, but she also criticized countries at the United Nations
for treating Israel unfairly. She said the United States remained committed
to its "steadfast support" for Israel and reminded the council that Israel
received an enormous amount of American military aid.

Ms. Power said
the United States chose not to veto the resolution, as it had done to a
similar measure under Mr. Obama in 2011, because settlement building had
accelerated so much that it had put the two-state solution in jeopardy, and
because the peace process had gone nowhere.

"Today the Security
Council reaffirmed its established consensus that settlements have no legal
validity," she said. "The United States has been sending a message that
settlements must stop privately and publicly for nearly five
decades."

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, who had
urged the American delegation to block the measure, expressed his
disappointment in a statement that looked forward to a change in policy
under Mr. Trump.

"It was to be expected that Israel’s greatest ally
would act in accordance with the values that we share and that they would
have vetoed this disgraceful resolution," he said.

The resolution
condemned Israeli housing construction in East Jerusalem and the occupied
West Bank as a "flagrant violation under international law" that was
"dangerously imperiling the viability" of a future peace settlement
establishing a Palestinian state.

The resolution also includes a nod to
Israel and its backers by condemning "all acts of violence against
civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation,
incitement and destruction." That language is diplomatic scolding aimed at
Palestinian leaders, whom Israel accuses of encouraging attacks on Israeli
civilians.

It is the first resolution the
Security Council has adopted on Israel and the Palestinians in nearly eight
years. (U.N. Security Council passes resolution demanding an end to Israeli
settlement building)

NEW YORK - The United Nations Security Council voted
on Friday to adopt a resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity as
illegal, and demanding that Israel "immediately and completely cease all
settlement activities in the 'occupied' Palestinian territory, including
east Jerusalem".

Fourteen out of the 15 voting members of the Council
voted in favor of the resolution, none voted against it, and the United
States chose to abstain instead of casting its veto on the
initiative.

The vote was originally scheduled to take place on Thursday,
but in a dramatic turn of events, Egypt, which had introduced the draft
resolution, withdrew it just hours before it was due to be considered at
the Security Council, as President-elect Donald Trump came out squarely
against it, saying the resolution "should be vetoed"

"As the United
States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians
will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not
through the imposition of terms by the United Nations. This puts Israel in a
very poor negotiating position, and is extremely unfair to all Israelis,"
Trump said in a statement.

For several months, as the possibility of an
anti-settlement resolution was being discussed, the question remained
whether or not President Barack Obama – an ardent opponent of the
settlements – will use the US veto in the Security Council to shield Israel
from it. In the days before the vote, there was a sense in Jerusalem that he
would not do so.

That sense was broadcast by Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, who tweeted on Thursday that "the US should veto the anti-Israel
resolution," and issued an even sharper statement again just before the
Egyptians announced that they were pulling back the
resolution.

"Israelis deeply appreciate one of the great pillars of the
US-Israel alliance: the willingness over many years for the US to stand up
in the UN and veto anti-Israel resolutions," he said. "I hope the US won’t
abandon this policy; I hope it will abide by the principles set by
President Obama himself in his speech in the UN in 2011: that peace will
come not through UN resolutions, but only through direct negotiations
between the parties."

In her speech to the Council following the
vote, US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power justified the US decision by
explaining that it is in line with the bipartisan US views regarding the
settlements for decades.

However, she explained the US isn’t supporting
the text because it focuses "too narrowly" on settlements, maintaining that
if every single settlement dismantled, it would still not guarantee
peace.

Power also spoke of Benjamin Netanyahu’s statements in favor of
the settlements, but also of the two state solution saying they are
"irreconcilable".

"One has to make a choice between settlements and
separation," she said.

However, she said, Friday’s vote was "not
straightforward" for the US because of its venue, the United
Nations.

"For as long as Israel has been a member of UN, it has been
treated differently," she told the Council.

Israel's Ambassador to
the United Nations Danny Danon responded harshly to the American decision
and stated that "neither the Security Council nor UNESCO can sever the tie
between the people of Israel and the land of Israel."

"It was to be
expected that Israel's greatest ally would act in accordance with the values
that we share and that they would have vetoed this disgraceful resolution,"
he said. "I have no doubt that the new US administration and the incoming UN
Secretary General will usher in a new era in terms of the UN's relationship
with Israel."

During his speech to the Security Council, Danon pointed
fingers at the member states.

"This is a dark day for this Council,"
he said. "The resolution you just voted on is the peak of hypocrisy. While
thousands are being massacred in Syria, this Council wasted valuable time
and efforts, condemning the democratic State of Israel for building homes in
the historic homeland of the Jewish people."

"By voting yes in favor
of this resolution, you have in fact voted no," he continued. "you voted no
to negotiations, you voted no to progress and a chance for better lives for
Israelis and Palestinians, and you voted no to the possibility of
peace."

Danon also called on the Council to "take this opportunity to
turn a new page, put an end to the bias and obsession with Israel, stop this
endless attempt to blame all the problems of the Middle East, on the one
true democracy in the region."

Following Friday’s outcome, many
Jewish Organizations from across the political spectrum, who had strongly
pushed and advocated for the US to veto the resolution, also expressed their
disappointment that the US chose to abstain.

The Conference of
Presidents of Major Jewish organizations said it deeply regrets and rejects
the US move.

"There is no justification or explanation that validates the
United States failure to veto the one-sided, offensive resolution adopted by
the Security Council today," the organization wrote. "The United States
vote will be seen as a betrayal of the fundamentals of the special
relationship that will nevertheless continue to mark the close ties
between the peoples of the two countries."

The American Jewish
Council CEO David Harris too said he is "deeply disappointed that the United
States chose to abstain on a UN Security Council resolution today which
singled out Israel for condemnation."

"The Administration’s decision, for
the first time in eight years, not to block an anti-Israel measure at the UN
Security Council is profoundly disturbing," he said. "It only encourages
diplomatic end-runs and diversionary tactics, which hinder rather than
advance the prospects for peace."

"Moreover, this measure repeats the
Palestinian falsehood that Israeli settlements constitute the core of the
conflict," Harris added. "Let’s be clear: The chief obstacle to achieving
peace is, and long has been, the steadfast refusal of the Palestinian
leadership to recognize Israel’s legitimacy and negotiate in earnest a
comprehensive agreement. Security Council members that supported the
resolution are not helping the cause of peace by their failure to hold the
Palestinians accountable for their chronic short-sightedness and
inaction."

(JTA) — The
World Jewish Congress joined calls by lawmakers in Israel and the United
States, including incoming Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, urging
the Obama administration to veto an anti-settlement resolution at the U.N.
Security Council.

The WJC statement Friday by its president, Ronald
Lauder, followed vigorous lobbying for a veto in Jerusalem and by
President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday and Friday. Trump and Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called on President Barack Obama to veto the
draft resolution submitted by Egypt in coordination with the Palestinians,
which called settlements "a flagrant violation of international law" that
damaged the prospects of two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict.

Following a telephone conversation between Trump and Egyptian
President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt put the draft resolution on hold. But
four Security Council member states, New Zealand, Venezuela, Malaysia and
Senegal, said they would submit their own draft resolution amid
speculation that Obama intended to let it pass if brought to a vote
Friday.

"We urge the United States, Israel’s greatest ally, to veto this
text," Lauder wrote in reference to the later draft. "It is
counterproductive, and does nothing to enhance the role of the United
Nations in resolving the Middle East conflict."

Schumer, D-N.Y., said
in a statement Friday that he spoke directly with the administration several
times, as recently as that morning, "and in the strongest terms possible
urged them to veto this resolution."

"Whatever one’s views are on
settlements, anyone who cares about the future of Israel and peace in the
region knows that the U.N., with its one sidedness, is exactly the wrong
forum to bring about peace," he wrote.

The junior senator from New York,
Kirsten Gillibrand, also a Democrat, wrote in a statement: "I call on the
Administration to do everything in its power to make sure this resolution is
not put forward or passed."

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., wrote in a
statement sent out by his office: "Unilateral resolutions of this kind do
not advance the cause of peace, and I would urge the Administration to make
every effort to oppose its being brought forward and make it clear that it
will veto the measure if necessary."

Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., backed
the veto calls, adding he would work in a bipartisan fashion to reduce U.S.
funding to the United Nations should the draft resolution
pass.

According to The Times of Israel, Israeli officials were furious
that the Obama administration allegedly was going to allow the vote to pass.
The news site quoted someone described as "an Israeli official" as
saying: "President Obama and Secretary [of State John] Kerry are behind
this shameful move against Israel at the U.N."

Neither Trump’s team
nor Egyptian officials would reveal the contents of the talk between the
president-elect and al-Sisi. Both Trump and Netanyahu took to social
networks to call for a U.S. veto.

On Facebook, Trump wrote that the
Egyptian draft resolution should be vetoed.

"As the United States has
long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only
come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the
imposition of terms by the United Nations. This puts Israel in a very poor
negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis," he
wrote.

And Netanyahu wrote on Twitter: "The U.S. should veto the
anti-Israel resolution at the U.N. Security Council on Thursday," referring
to the Egyptian text. It was an unusually public appeal regarding an issue
that is usually coordinated between the two allies behind closed doors,
suggesting that Netanyahu was not certain that the United States under
Obama would indeed veto.

Israel approached the Trump campaign after
it felt that it had failed to persuade the Obama administration to veto the
planned vote, an Israeli official told CNN. The official said that Israel
"implored the White House not to go ahead and told them that if they did, we
would have no choice but to reach out to President-elect Trump."

The
United States has long complained of anti-Israel bias at the United
Nations.

Under Obama, Washington also publicly criticized Israeli
construction in the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem and all other lands
captured by Israel in 1967 as detrimental to the two-state solution for the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

(JTA) — A growing list of Jewish groups and U.S. lawmakers
joined the call urging the Obama administration to veto an anti-settlement
resolution at the U.N. Security Council.

The World Jewish Congress,
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Jewish Council for
Public Affairs joined incoming Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer,
D-N.Y., and other lawmakers in urging the administration to veto the
resolution expected to come up for a vote on Friday afternoon.

The
resolution, which calls Israeli settlements "a flagrant violation of
international law" that damage the prospects of a two-state solution to
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, was introduced by Egypt in
coordination with the Palestinians. Amid growing pressure from Israel
and President-elect Donald Trump, Egypt put the resolution on hold on
Thursday. On Friday, four Security Council member states — New Zealand,
Venezuela, Malaysia and Senegal — said they would submit their own draft
resolution amid speculation that President Barack Obama intended to let
it pass.

"We urge the United States, Israel’s greatest ally, to veto
this text," World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder said in a
statement Friday. "It is counterproductive, and does nothing to enhance the
role of the United Nations in resolving the Middle East
conflict."

Schumer said in a statement Friday that he spoke directly with
the administration several times, as recently as that morning, "and in the
strongest terms possible urged them to veto this
resolution."

"Whatever one’s views are on settlements, anyone who cares
about the future of Israel and peace in the region knows that the U.N., with
its one sidedness, is exactly the wrong forum to bring about peace," he
wrote.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Jewish
Council for Public Affairs both released statements Friday urging the
administration to veto the resolution.

"All those who support a
peaceful resolution to the conflict should oppose this resolution," said
David Bernstein, JCPA’s president. "If the Palestinians feel that the UN
will deliver Israel for them, why would they negotiate?"

The junior
senator from New York, Kirsten Gillibrand, also a Democrat, wrote in a
statement: "I call on the Administration to do everything in its power to
make sure this resolution is not put forward or passed."

Rep. Adam
Schiff, D-Calif., wrote in a statement sent out by his office: "Unilateral
resolutions of this kind do not advance the cause of peace, and I would urge
the Administration to make every effort to oppose its being brought forward
and make it clear that it will veto the measure if
necessary."

Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., backed the veto calls, adding he
would work in a bipartisan fashion to reduce U.S. funding to the United
Nations should the draft resolution pass. [...]

Israel's
Prime Minister has taken diplomatic action against the countries that
co-sponsored a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement
construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Key points

Benjamin Netanyahu cancels aid to co-sponsors of Security Council
resolution

Resolution condemns Israeli settlements in West Bank
and East Jerusalem

Donald Trump promises 'things will be different'
when he takes office

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office announced
the steps a few hours after the United States broke with past practice and
chose not to veto the measure.

The resolution was put forward at the
15-member council for a vote by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal
a day after Egypt withdrew it under pressure from Israel and President-elect
Donald Trump, who pushed for a veto.

The resolution demanded that
Israel "immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the
occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem" and said the
establishment of settlements by Israel had "no legal validity and
constitutes a flagrant violation under international law".

Mr
Netanyahu ordered Israel's ambassadors in New Zealand and Senegal to
immediately return home for consultations.

He also instructed the
Foreign Ministry to end all aid programs for Senegal and to cancel a planned
visit to Israel by the Senegalese foreign minister.

Shortly after the
measures were announced, Israel's UN ambassador called the Security
Council's vote "a victory for terror".

Danny Danon told the council after
the 14-0 vote the resolution was full of "lies" and will be added "to the
long and shameful list of anti-Israel UN resolutions".

"By voting
'yes' in favour of this resolution, you have in fact voted 'no'. You voted
'no' to negotiations. You voted 'no' to progress, and a chance for better
lives for Israelis and Palestinians. And you voted 'no' to the possibility
of peace," he said.

New era for Israel's relations with US,
UN?

Under the UN Charter, UN member states "agree to accept and carry out
the decisions of the Security Council".

Mr Danon said the council was
"sending a message to the Palestinians that they should continue on the path
of terrorism and incitement".

"I have no doubt that the new US
administration and the incoming UN secretary-general will usher in a new era
in terms of the UN's relationship with Israel," he said.

Mr Danon
urged incoming UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to make clear to the
Palestinians the only way forward is "to end incitement and terror and to
enter meaningful negotiations with Israel".

Mr Guterres takes office
January 1, replacing incumbent Ban Ki-moon.

Mr Ban called the resolution
a "significant step" to reconfirm the vision of a two-state solution with
the Palestinians.

He said the vote demonstrated the Security Council's
"much needed leadership and the international community's collective
efforts" that are critical to demonstrate a two-state solution where Israel
and the Palestinians live side by side in peace "is still
achievable".

But Mr Netanyahu said, "at a time when the Security Council
does nothing to stop the slaughter of half a million people in Syria, it
disgracefully gangs up on the one true democracy in the Middle East,
Israel, and calls the Western Wall 'occupied territory'".

The US
abstention was seen as a parting shot at policy by US President Barack
Obama, who has made settlements a major target of peace efforts that have
ultimately failed.

Shortly after the vote Mr Trump tweeted "things will
be different" with the UN after his inauguration.

Mr Trump is likely
to be a more staunch supporter of Mr Netanyahu's right-wing policies. He
named a hard-line pro-Israel ambassador and vowed to move the US Embassy
from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Palestinian UN ambassador Riyad Mansour said
the resolution "is significant after years of paralysis" and a step toward
addressing "a 70-year open wound" that has prevented peace and stability in
the region.

The resolution demands an immediate halt to Israeli
settlement building, and Mr Mansour said that will require "vigilant
follow-up if it is to be meaningful, to stem further deterioration and
salvage the two-state solution from relegation to history's
archives".

He urged the council to "stand firm by this decision" and "not
be cowed by negative threats or spin".

The Palestinians want an
independent state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, areas Israel
captured in a 1967 war.

Israel disputes that settlements are illegal and
says their final status should be determined in talks on Palestinian
statehood. The last round of US-led peace talks between the Israelis and
Palestinians collapsed in 2014.

Israel will re-assess its ties with the
United Nations following the adoption by the Security Council of a
resolution demanding an end to Israeli settlement building, Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu said on Saturday.

The vote was able to pass the
15-member council on Friday because the United States broke with a
long-standing approach of diplomatically shielding Israel and did not wield
its veto power as it had on many times before - a decision that Netanyahu
called "shameful".

"I instructed the Foreign Ministry to complete within
a month a re-evaluation of all our contacts with the United Nations,
including the Israeli funding of U.N. institutions and the presence of U.N.
representatives in Israel," Netanyahu said in broadcast remarks.

"I
have already instructed to stop about 30 million shekels ($7.8 million) in
funding to five U.N. institutions, five bodies, that are especially hostile
to Israel ... and there is more to come," he said.

The Israeli leader did
not name the institutions or offer any further details.

Defying heavy
pressure from long-time ally Israel and President-elect Donald Trump for
Washington to use its veto, the United States abstained in the Security
Council decision, which passed with 14 votes in favor.

Israel for decades
has pursued a policy of constructing Jewish settlements on territory
captured by Israel in a 1967 war with its Arab neighbors including the West
Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.

Most countries view Israeli settlement
activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and an obstacle to
peace. Israel disagrees, citing a biblical connection to the
land.

Liberal American groups welcomed the UN
security council resolution on Israeli settlements while mainstream
pro-Israel groups blasted the U.S. for allowing it to pass.

J Street,
the dovish pro-Israel lobby, welcomed the resolution.

"The resolution is
consistent with longstanding bipartisan American policy, which includes
strong support for the two-state solution, and clear opposition to
irresponsible and damaging actions, including Palestinian incitement and
terror and Israeli settlement expansion and home demolitions," J Street
said.

The American Jewish Committee in a statement Friday said it was
"deeply disappointed that the United States chose to abstain on a U.N.
Security Council resolution today which singled out Israel for
condemnation."

Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of
America, slammed the decision. The New York Post quoted him saying "Obama
has made it clear that he’s a Jew hating, anti-Semite. He likes Jews who are
his friends but not Jews in general."

About Me

'Mission statement'.
I am convinced that jewish individuals and groups have an enormous influence on the world. The MSM are, for almost all people, the only source of information, and these are largely controlled by jewish people.
So there is a huge under-reporting on jewish influence in the world.
I see it as my mission to try to close this gap. To quote Henry Ford: "Corral the 50 wealthiest jews and there will be no wars." `(Thomas Friedman wrote the same in Haaretz, about the war against Iraq! See yellow marked area, blog 573)
If that is true, my mission must be very beneficial to humanity.